Here are a few bits and pieces that you may not have seen from the last few days.

Two years on, BH reader Jonathan Jones has managed to extract the CRUTEM data from UEA, with the Information Commissioner coming down almost completely against UEA's stonewalling. Huge kudos is due. Lucia is much amused by the commissioner's wording.

The Association of British Science Writers has issued its shortlist for this year's prizes. Fred Pearce's coverage of Doug Keenan's fraud allegations against Phil Jones is up for best investigative journalism. This is an odd one - given that Russell has said Jones did nothing wrong, surely Keenan's allegations are groundless? How can Pearce's article be prizeworthy? :-)

Lord Monckton upset lots of people by comparing a prominent Australian green to a Nazi. As a result, a campaign has been started to prevent Monckton from speaking at the University of Notre Dame. Irony is lost on some people.

A Scottish blog is reporting that green surcharges applied to consumers electricity bills may have no legal basis. Extraordinary if true.

David Stockwell has submitted a paper that will apparently demonstrate that recent warming is primarily due to solar variability - you can't see it at the moment though because it's under embargo until it's published.

And lastly, Roy Spencer looks at ocean heat and wonders if the missing heat that climatologists say is lurking down there somewhere isn't just missing.

With this figure, the IPCC was cleverly able to make it LOOK like there was general agreement between their climate models (green shaded area) and observations (red curve), with no less than four ploys:

1) They chose a climate model (PCM1) that is the 2nd LEAST sensitive of the twenty-something climate models they survey. PCM1 produces even less warming than the IPCC’s official projected range of warming from a doubling of CO2.

2) For the PCM1 model results, they presented a rather broad range of warming (green shaded area), meant to represent natural climate variations about the average warming produced by the model. In this way, they were able to get the weak observed warming to better overlap with the model produced warming, suggesting agreement.

3) They omitted the 0 deg. (no temperature change) vertical line from the figure, the presence of which would have visually revealed the significant discrepancy between the PCM1 model results and the observations.

4) They made the ocean depth scale nonlinear, which disproportionally emphasized the agreement in the relatively shallow mixed layer of the ocean, while downplaying the rather large discrepancy deeper down. But there is NO physical reason to make the ocean depth scale nonlinear; the total heat carrying capacity of the ocean varies linearly with depth, not non-linearly.

Even odder among the shortlisted items by the Association of British Science Writers is Steve Connor, Science Editor of The Independent, for “Fabricated Quote used to Discredit Climate Scientist”.Steve is honoured for having revealed that what he calls “the iconic smoking gun of the climate sceptic community” - Sir John Houghton’s "Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen" was never said.What he really said was “If we want a good environmental policy in the future we’ll have to have a disaster” - a fact which was not revealed in the article, but only much later, after Sir John’s professions of innocence and demands for apologies from Booker, Peiser et al.

Prof. Ross Garnaut is not a green. He is an economist, who pretends to be the expert on climate change, and the well-paid lackey of the Labor Government but, in his spare time, he wrecks the environment of PNG with real pollution.See http://www.stopgillardscarbontax.com/2011/06/will-the-real-garnaut-please-stand-up.html

I share Lucia's amusement. Reading about this decision on CA, I was amused, too, by Nik Stokes, Rattus et al's attempts to defend the indefensible by using incredibly convoluted circular arguments. They have obviously never got the hang of the basic principle of Occam's Razor.Being serious in a joyful way. I see this decision as a vindication of FOI and a complete clearing away of the huge quantity of smoke worthy of a great maritime battle that the great and good at UEA have been puffing out to hide behind.

"What if a powerful media conglomerate, such as modern day William Randolph Hearst, controlled the media around a major University to influence students and professors to directly advance his financial interests? I have found that person, HM Lord Lieutenant Richard Jewson, who 1) has a direct connection to the British monarchy, 2) is on the board of many multi-national "green" corporations, 3) directly controls a major media market servicing EA University and other British Universities, and 4) as a member of the board of EAU (sic), has significant control over their environmental studies department."

Andrew, please could we have a separate thread on the unequivocal ICO ruling regarding the release of CRUTEM data? I think this is a big story with a lot of implications, and it seems a shame to have it tucked away under 'climate cuttings'.

In Alistair Cooke's "America" he wrote about the American bible belt taking an extreme fundamentalist position in response to Darwin's work. Those who accepted evolution - rational people - rubbed their noses in it so badly that the religious became ever more entrenched. Before this conflict very few churchmen would claim that Noah's Ark was a literal truth; after it many did. No juicy facts emerging from UEA under FOI will shake the faith of Huhne and his ilk.

The uebergreens have been spectacularly successful in getting "fun-ding" and influencing government policy. The Global Warming Industry now has its own momentum (remember Eisenhower's final address in which he warned of the 'military industrial complex'? This is a re-run.) with - oh, Lordy! - MBAs in Carbon Management and... ah, you know the rest.

Question: Where are we to find political momentum to counter this? Al Gore - love him or loathe him - has been more influential than a hundred Lawsons or Mocktons. The public say Global Warming is all cobblers, but wouldn't dream of going on a protest march with banners saying "We're not worried!"

There MUST be political mileage in reflecting Joe Public's view that AGW is nothing but hype. How?

MONBIOT REMOVES THE EVIDENCE.I may be going mad, so I would appeal for readers of this blog for help.On 14th July 2010 I was present to witness George Monbiot's finest hour, at a debate at Portland Place whereat he, ably assisted by McIntyre and Keenan, destroyed the arguments of Phil Jones boss, Prof Trevor Davies. Keenan even had repeatedly to remind Davies where he'd been on certain dates.While Bob Watson waffled impotently at intervals.The only evidence I have that the debate took place is a dedication (dated) in Fred Pearce's book 'The Climate Files'.On the subsequent days Monbiot trumpeted his achievement with videos of the proceedings, on his blog.These have now all mysteriously disappeared.The only evidence that there ever was a 'spat' between George and the UEA is still up there in a February post (5 months before). Even the susequent apology for this has now gone.I think Latimer Alder was there as were many others, but I would like some confirmation that the event actually took place !

Ref my request for help, see above. This is the one post that Monbiot has not deleted, his spirited attack on Phil Jones and the corruption at UEA.Presumably that's how he wants 'history' to remember his part in all this, does he now think that he debate was an 'aberration' ?

Eisenhower was right."Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite."

How prescient.

Also, the original draft version of 'Military-Industrial complex' was 'Military-Industrial-Congressional complex' which makes it much clearer that his intention was to attack the link between votes and funding.

A fine collection of 'bits and pieces'.Presumably, the Scottish Power story will apply to all other electricity suppliers in the UK. What fun!Refunds for everyone potentially unless the government passes retrospective legislation and it should at least force government to legislate for future 'renewable taxes' making charges open and transparent.I look forward to comments about this from the many experts who write here.

stopcpdotcomThe obsession in certain quarters with the idea that Britain is about to be taken over by a sinister group of anonymous lefties occasionally gets out of hand. While I agree that the current Tory party is hardly what I would call 'Conservative' I don't think we've quite got to the stage where Common Purpose can be considered a major threat to the peace and security of the nation. (If we end up in adjacent cells, I will apologise).Specifically:Richard Jewson is indeed Lord-Liutenant of Norfolk but I can find no evidence that (other than that) he has any direct line to Buckingham Palace.He currently holds five directorships, none of which appears to have any particularly "green" credentials and none of which would normally be described as "multi-national".One of these directorships is Archant, a newspaper and magazine publisher with four daily papers in East Anglia and a slew of weeklies covering the east and south-east of England -- hardly a "major media market".He is pro-chancellor of UEA which will give him no control whatsoever over its environmental studies department. If his job is anything like that of the only pro-chancellor I know personally he probably chairs the Remunerations Committee and the Appointments Board and stands in for Sir Brandon Gough when he can't be bothered turning up for minor university events.So, with all the other important things going on, can we have a bit less of the conspiracy theories, please?

Toad - I was there. I even took 3 photos of the venue, but it looks like someone has hacked into my mobile phone and deleted all the people from the pictures, all I can see are rows of empty seats. So either it is a very elaborate cover up, or I got there before everyone else arrived - oh yeah that was it.

It was real, I have copies of my electronic ticket & invoice from amiando:

Climategate: The greatest scandal to hit climate science or a storm in a teacup? on July 14, 2010

I sat on the front row, next to some seats that had been reserved. BIG mistake... I ended up being surrounded by journalists who for some unknown reason reminded me of the Hyenas in The Lion King. I wouldn't like to suggest that they are all prejudiced, but when Piers Corbyn was given the opportunity to ask a question, the hyena next to me tutted and whispered to me - "You know what he's going to say before he even opens his mouth " - Just as well really, because I didn't see any of them taking notes.

The highlight of the event was George wetting himself about DK making accusations of fraud, I believe that part was edited out of the video - shame.

Toad, re last year's debate, there's still a video of this on the Guardian site, although it represents just a fraction of the entire proceedings:http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/video/2010/jul/15/climategate-guardian-debate

It's also possible (or at least it was, earlier) to download an MP3 of the audio. I have a sound recording of the whole debate, (taken with my MP3 player/sound recorder) but the quality isn't brilliant; have been meaning to put together a transcript at some point.

Hyperthermania. Thanks for the confirmation that it took place. OK so the original video posted on Monbiot's blog was doctored, but that was presumably how he wanted it remembered, and of course, Keenan was hoping that it would result in legal action against him, which he was only too ready to defend.For George the whole thing was a personal triumph, which makes it very strange that he's deleted it and yet left the vigorous attack on Phil Jones and the UEA that he posted in the February.The highlight for me was when a Caroline Lucas lookalike in front of me, stood up and said 'my names Joolia and I was at Copenhagen', she must have quite near to you !

toadThe audio recording is still up athttp://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/audio/2010/jul/15/guardian-climategate-hacked-emails-debateAlex CullGive me a time (mins and secs) to come in and I’ll give you a hand with the transcription.

toadMcIntyre’s invitation was an afterthought, provoked by the publicity around the fact that a number of readers put up his air fare. I believe he was edited out of the short video the Guardian put up, while Keenan’s contribution was edited out of the audio.The Guardian’s aim in originally planning to have the little-known Keenan as sole representative of the sceptics seems to have been the hope that his comments wold be libellous and therefore wouldn’t have to be reported. Pearce was aware of Keenan’s accusations against Wang and Jones and would have informed his masters. The Guardian was clearly and presciently hoping for a dress rehearsal of the Russell enquiry, with no witnesses and no questions asked.

Regarding the debate about Climategate, on 14 July 2010, I have a copy of the full recording, made by The Guardian. I am not allowed to publish the recording, but I could supply the parts that were redacted from the published version, for making a transcript. If someone wants those parts, feel free to e-mail me: doug symbol keenan symbol informath symbol org.

The problem in the IPCC models seems to be that they mix excess heat too rapidly from the mixed layer into the deep ocean. This allows the models to retain high climate sensitivity, while limiting the amount of surface warming they produce to match the observed warming to date.

Voila! The models can thus “explain” the surface temperature record AND STILL predict strong warming for the future.

Many thanks Alex Cull, TerryS, Geoff Chambers and of course Doug Keenan himself.Two points occur to me - How much have things really changed since then ? Would those same people say the same today- particularly Pearce, Davies (re the UEA)and Watson (re the IPCC) ?Secondly I believe Monbiot is above all a showman who loves being centre stage ( I think we can just hear him 'cautioning' Piers Corbyn). Getting Steve McIntyre there was the 'coup' of the decade, dangerous though it was.Will we ever see such high level protagonists on the same platform ever again ?Hearing Billy Graham in Hong Kong nearly 60 years ago had nothing on this !